I do NPDA and NFA–LD debate in college. I did (Lay) policy debate for 4 years in KS 

I've learned that as I judge more the more I realize I don't particularly care for certain arguments over others. Rather, I care more about debaters doing what they're good at and maximizing their talents. Granted to whereas I'm ok with you reading whatever, given its not problematic, do keep in mind that the experience I've had with debate/arguments might not make me the best decision maker in the back of the room for that round. So if you get me in the back of the room read what you want but be mindful it might need a little explanation in the Rebuttals. I default tech over truth. The only time I'll use truth as a means of decision making is to break a tie in an argument which usually will only happen if the debate is very messy. I'm okay with speed if I cant catch what you're putting down I'll say CLEAR... I'll say clear three times before I stop flowing. Slow down on analytics even if they're on the doc. You shouldn't be reading analytics at card speed. 

If you wanna know how I evaluate args in depth check my paradigm